The week ahead in presidential politics, is, frankly, bizarre. It’s the first time in history in which very consequential campaigning takes place during the Christmas and New Year’s holidays. For that, we can thank our friends in Iowa and New Hampshire, who cling to to their traditional first-in-the-nation status beyond most semblances of rationality.

And so yesterday saw the former president of the United States, Bill Clinton, and his former first lady wife, Hillary Clinton, trying against the odds with full schedules in icy Iowa for each, to stave off the candidacy of freshman Illinois Senator Barack Obama. Who was also all over Iowa, where he has a narrow but consistent lead. The Clintons, proprietors of the most awesome political machine in America, were further motivated in their quest to tamp down the tyro who would be America’s first president of color by fresh news from their “firewall” primary state, New Hampshire, where Obama has just taken the merest sliver of a lead after trailing by 20 points in November.

Now, on Christmas Eve, and at least continuing into Christmas Day, we are in what in campaign terms is called a “float.” No campaigning. Well, except for whatever might be arriving belatedly by mail.

The Clintons are struggling with one of the most fundamental questions of all. Who is the principal? Is it the New York senator and former first lady who has seemed, at least to the credulous, a dominatingly inevitable frontrunner all year long. Or is it the popular former president, without whom Hillary would be, not to put too fine a point on it, Hillary Who?

As to which is first, or at least, on first, that is a larger question than I am willing to deal with over Christmas. Hillary may, or may not, have made Bill possible. But without President Bill, there is probably no Senator Hill, much less would-be President Hill.

Beyond which we get into questions of interest only to diehard Clinton loyalists. Or to the dramatists of miniseries. Hold that thought.

For Democrats have a strong field this year, including John Edwards, who in another year would not be Barack Obama’s spoiler, but the clear favorite, and Obama himself, the best orator in the country, a record-breaking fundraiser, and the first black candidate with a very serious chance to win the presidency.

So serious, in fact, that he is leading in largely lily-white Iowa, and in at least a dead heat with Hillary in her supposed firewall state of New Hampshire.

Obama, who at last turned in a good debate performance on December 13th — better late than never — is showing one of two things. Either he has improved dramatically, or the press — which slavishly followed the Clinton campaign meme of the “inevitable” Hillary for many months — is at last realizing that what Hillary was saying about refusing to talk to enemies and a silly notion of nuclear “deterrence” is more ahistorical nonsense than political good sense. Which is another way of saying that actual voters, when they considered it, didn’t buy the Beltway conventional wisdom.

For the umpteenth time in history, for those who care or notice.

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee is holding onto the lead in Iowa. Which he seized from the megabucks frontrunner there, Mitt Romney, against all odds. The Republicans are in the midst of vicious civil war now. Their evangelical Christian component, which doctrinaire conservatives in the Washington and pundit class, would-be and otherwise, have been happy to have supply needed votes and otherwise keep out of the way, have found their man. And it’s the unwanted man, a Baptist minister and successful governor of godblasted Arkansas, who doesn’t believe in evolution, does believe in the greenhouse effect, and thinks that a certain populist concern for the less than rich is more important than the party’s no new taxes mantra. Or the bomb Iran mantra, which was thoroughly disrupted last month by the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which found no clear and present danger of an Iranian nuclear weapon. And so Rudy Giuliani’s dramatic reboot of his campaign last weekend — “America needs strength” — fell flat.

Giuliani, the social liberal/warhawk erstwhile frontrunner, is not a political hemophiliac exactly. But he is rapidly fading off the radar screen, following after another touted candidate, Fred Thompson, who — barring a dramatic comeback — essentially ended his candidacy when he announced it on The Tonight Show. As I rather politely alluded to, at great length, that very night this past September.

This would leave Mitt Romney as the doctrinaire and clearcut choice as the GOP nominee, but for three inconvenient truths. He has recently changed his position on some of the biggest values issues of our time. He is a Mormon, which evangelicals and many other Americans consider to be a science fiction religion. (To say that Democrats would enjoy running against Romney is to engage in considerable understatement.) And he is behind in Iowa, where he has spent more money than any candidate in history, and has been caught in New Hampshire, the neighboring state to his one-term Massachusetts governorship — which he won by espousing a politics quite different from the one he is currently running on — by a guy who has already been killed off twice in this very year which is about to end.

That would be Captain John McCain, USN (retired, for medical reasons). The veteran Arizona senator, son of CINCPAC (Commander-In-Chief-Pacific Command), one of the most famous heroes of the Vietnam War, started the year as the Republican presidential frontrunner. Only to fall, not once, but twice. First, because independents and moderates abandoned him for his stubbornness on the Iraq War surge. Then as conservatives excoriated him for his moderation on illegal immigration.

But the truth is that every top Republican other than Thompson is “squishy” on illegal immigration. Vide Romney’s household workers, Huckabee’s scholarships, and Giulian’s “sanctuary city.”And McCain, given the real but of necessity limited military success of the surge — which now requires political progress with Iraqi factions and engagement with Iran in order to ultimately succeed, just as the Iraq Study Group pointed out a year ago — looks rather prescient. McCain warned for years that the wrong course was being followed in Iraq. Too few boots on the ground, too little challenging of Iraq’s various factions to get off their asses if they wanted their country to succeed.

John McCain, whose Christmas ad – Why are they doing Christmas ads? Because this crazy campaign has the candidates campaigning over the holidays, that’s why. – goes Mike Huckabee’s notorious “floating cross” spot one better by overtly using an incident from his prisoner of war days to invoke the cross, is coming back for a third time in this campaign. And at just the right time. He’s backed by a raft of newspapers, right and left, and the Democrats’ 2000 vice presidential nominee-turned-independent senator, Joe Lieberman.

Previously knocked down and seemingly out by the loss of moderates and independents over his war stance, and conservatives over his immigration stance, McCain is taking advantage of the chaos that is the Republican presidential field to come on again in New Hampshire and other early states. He’s picked up the endorsement of both big papers in the former Massachusetts governor’s erstwhile home town – the conservative Boston Herald and liberal Boston Globe – as well as the Des Moines Register and most of the papers in New Hampshire, including the staunchly conservative Manchester Union Leader. All of which is an aggravation to Romney, who has counted on his neighbor status from his Massachusetts governor days to make him a favorite son.

If Mike Huckabee carries on in Iowa, New Hampshire is looking good for McCain.

But there’s a dark cloud on the horizon. Or, I should say, there was. A leaked story on the Drudge Report, the famous conduit for mostly right-wing dirt. Or, as is often the case there, a leaked notion of a story. That the New York Times is going to drop a bomb on McCain with an investigative piece about him doing favors for telecom companies, and their female lobbyist, in his Senate Commerce Committee.

Actually, the Drudge Report said the story would run Friday in the Times. It never showed. Whatever is going on, McCain thinks it’s serious enough he’s hired heavyweight DC lawyer Bob Bennett to deal with the situation.

Incidentally, I think that if politicians want to wear their crosses on their sleeves, as it were, it’s their right to do so. (Personally, I enjoy Huckabee’s floating cross ad and McCain’s ad.) I also think that it is fair game to take a hard look at the specifics of their religious beliefs.

Which is another column of its own. Though not one that reflects well for a general election.

Bill Bradley is a PJ Media correspondent. His PajamasXpress blog is New West Notes.

Click here to view the 4 legacy comments

Click here to hide legacy comments

4 Comments, 4 Threads

FRED THOMPSON is the best person to lead this country. He is a true conservative and has been his entire life. All one has to do is check his record to see this.

During my time in the Army as an Intelligence Analyst, I served under both Presidents Carter and Reagan (as my commanders in chief). Without argument, President Reagan was the best commander-in-chief a military person could ever have served under. Fred Thompson possesses the same qualities and vision as President Reagan in that he is strong on national defense and sees a dire need to secure our borders and control immigration.

I can think of no better person to lead this country and fix the problems we have. He is the only candidate from either party who has specific and detailed plans on border security and immigration reform; revitalization of America’s armed forces; saving and protecting Social Security; and tax relief and economic growth. These are detailed on his Web site at http://www.fred08.com . I challenge you to find any other candidate who has laid out specific plans to fix anything.

Fred Thompson has published his first principles, some of which are mentioned above. In addition to those, he strongly believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, federalism, traditional American values, the rule of law and is a strong proponent of the Second Amendment – all concepts established during the birth of our country and documented in our Constitution.

Again, try to find any candidate who has laid out their plans to “fix” this country. You will find they all speak in vague and abstract terms on their plans.

For those who have heard Fred Thompson speak, you will usually hear him say that the Fred Thompson you see today is the same Fred Thompson you saw yesterday and is the same Fred Thompson you will see tomorrow. He stands by his principles and values and doesn’t shift his positions based on polls or public opinion; in other words, he doesn’t say what the voters want to hear just to get elected, but remains steadfast on his views and convictions.

During his time in the Senate he focused on three areas: to lower taxes, strengthen national security and expose waste in the federal government. Fred Thompson has foreign policy experience, having served as member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Intelligence committees.

As chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, he opened the investigation in 1997 on the Chinese government’s attempt to influence American policies and elections, and this investigation identified connections with the Clinton administration (documented in the committee’s report).

As a member of the Finance Committee, he worked tirelessly to enact three major tax-cut bills. Fred Thompson remains steadfast and even though a person may not agree with all his views and he understands some may disagree with him, you can count on him to be consistent and unwavering.

Don’t be fooled by his laid back approach and what critics call his “laziness.” As a former assistant U.S. attorney, he earned a reputation as a tough prosecutor and he possesses the toughness this country needs in order to tackle today’s and tomorrow’s issues.

I ask that you take a hard look at what this country needs, then take a hard look at all the other candidates’ views, policies, their records and their track record on consistency. Fred Thompson possesses integrity, loyalty, commitment, energy and decisiveness, all traits of an effective leader, and will emerge as the best person to take this country boldly forward.

Republican voters are more working-middle class than the Dem/Media coalition that McCain (R-Media) courts.

They hated Amnesty because it brought them higher taxes, lower wages, congestion, crime, and marginalization in their own country. McCain pushed the issue and paid the price for it.

Iraq War figured little in McCain’s fall — he had always been an elite, media courting liberal (a RINO) who would be as popular as Joe Lieberman in his primaries.

McCain is also guilty of political cowardice as far as the base is concerned — wanting Miranda Rights for terrorists but unwilling to take the heat if plots succeed because we didn’t waterboard KSM or Zubadayah. Most of the Republican Base (and likely most Americans) would not shed a tear if blowtorches were taken to those people (or Osama).

Despite his record of service, McCain is the weakest in terms of counter-terror of all the candidates. Likely because he loves the approval of the press like a puppy. For the base, particularly middle-working class people, this is a deal breaker and explains his early crash far more than the Iraq War.